Re: earliest supported kernel is 2.6.32 now
On Tue, 17 May 2011, Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org> wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 11:42:52PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> > > In general there is no requirement to reuse the dom0 kernel as your
> > > domU kernel, although I appreciate that some hosting providers may add
> > > that sort of requirement (or a similar requirement to use one of a
> > > blessed set of kernels).
> >
> > http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenDom0Kernels
> > The above URL describes the requirements for kernels. A pvops Xen Linux
> > kernel (EG the one from Squeeze) requires at least Xen 4.0.
>
> Please stop spreading fud.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt
Please read the above Wikipedia page. You will find nothing in that page to
describe observing a product to not work, reading documentation that appears
to explain why it doesn't work, and telling others.
> > have version 3.1.2 of the Xen kernel and thus won't boot a Squeeze
> > kernel.
>
> And the error may be what?
I've just tested it again and it works. I didn't make a record of what the
error was, Xen just didn't seem to like the kernel and it aborted early in the
DomU creation process.
Back to the main topic, there are always reasons for not using a particular
kernel. RHEL5 had Ext4 support when Lenny had Ext4dev, I guess I could have
enabled Ext4dev on my Lenny systems that needed something better than Ext3 but
it seemed like a safer bet to use the RHEL5 kernel.
Finally sometimes kernels just crash for no reason that's easy to debug. Sure
it would be nice to be able to devote a lot of time to determining the cause
and making a good bug report, but when a system that has been running reliably
for years fails after an upgrade it's a lot easier to just keep using the old
kernel.
We support things like running an AMD64 kernel with i386 user-space. It would
be nice if we could support a Lenny kernel with Squeeze user-space for as long
as Lenny is supported.
--
My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/
My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
Reply to: